Mississippi Atheists

Evangelicals and Atheists Have Something in Common

2011-05-27T11:12:00.001-05:00

I was at work yesterday when the tornado siren went off. We had a tornado warning in the Hattiesburg area, and people are clearly taking these more seriously after all the damage seen recently in other areas. While searching the web to see what I could find about the likely duration of the warning, I ran across something unexpected on a local TV station website (WDAM): Being 'born-again' linked to more brain atrophy.

Evidently, the same Christian god who was sending tornados my way wanted me to find this article about a scientific study linking religious experiences and atheism to brain dysfunction.

According to the study, people who said they were a "born-again" Protestant or Catholic, or conversely, those who had no religious affiliation, had more hippocampal shrinkage (or "atrophy") compared to people who identified themselves as Protestants, but not born-again.

It sounds like the researchers interpreted the findings as being due to "holding religious beliefs that fall outside of the mainstream." In other words, both evangelical Christians and atheists may experience added stress (known to affect the brain) from holding unconventional beliefs.

"One interpretation of our finding -- that members of majority religious groups seem to have less atrophy compared with minority religious groups -- is that when you feel your beliefs and values are somewhat at odds with those of society as a whole, it may contribute to long-term stress that could have implications for the brain," Amy Owen, lead author of the study and a research associate at Duke University Medical Center, said in a Duke news release.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Darwin Day at the University of New Orleans

2011-04-05T05:55:00.001-05:00

If Charles Darwin's birthday is February 12, why did New Orleans celebrate it on March 26? I am sure there is a perfectly reasonable explanation. It could be as simple as, “Well, this is New Orleans.” I personally favor the numerological explanation – March 26 is 42 days after Darwin's birthday, and as readers of Douglas Adams know, this number is the answer to the meaning of life, the universe, and everything.

Whatever the reason, on a beautiful, breezy morning at UNO's lakefront campus, a hundred or so people gathered to listen to four presentations from academics representing four different universities.

First on the speaker list was Trenton Holliday, professor of Anthropology at Tulane University. Professor Holliday's topic was 'New Perspectives on the Origin of the Genus Homo.' Holliday took the audience through a series of models of the evolution of our Genus, based mostly on evidence from the fossil record. Anyone who is under the illusion that our evolution took a simple path from Australopithecus to Homo habilus to Homo erectus to Homo sapiens will be surprised at the degree of uncertainty existing in the field of human ancestry.

The most interesting point I took away from the discussion is the fact that the more data we uncover in the fossil record, the more complicated the picture gets. To those unfamiliar with the scientific method, this might seem counterintuitive. One would think that the more data one collects, the more clear the picture of the subject matter should become. In reality, the opposite is often true. Especially in a rather new science. Most of the fossil evidence related to hominid evolution has been discovered in my lifetime. And I am not all that old. Really, I'm not. Certainly not as old as Lucy, the Australopithecus afarensis specimen thought to be over three million years old. I was in college when she was discovered in 1974. She was named for the Beatles song 'Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.' Another limitation on the field is the fact that it relies almost exclusively on fossil evidence. Two or three million year old bones don't have any DNA left to analyze, so we can't use the powerful tool of DNA analysis to establish relationships among all the various fossil specimens we have collected. I was reminded that the discipline of biology itself, and its central organizing principle – evolution by random mutation and natural selection - is barely a century and a half old. It did not exist before Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859.

The most interesting question asked during the Q&A part of the presentation was whether every evolutionary path to an existing organism – horses, for example – might be just as complex as the hominid lineage. The consensus among the experts in attendance was 'yes, almost certainly, why wouldn't they be?' Indeed, why not? Charles Darwin's extraordinary insights put us in the same category as any other creature struggling to survive and reproduce. We are not special. This is why Darwin matters.

This is why I am writing my first posts as a religious skeptic around four Darwin Day presentations. I was raised Catholic. My parents were both avid readers on a wide variety of subjects. They had a great library. When I was twelve years old, I pulled down The Voyage of the Beagle, Darwin's journal on his travels as naturalist aboard the HMS Beagle in 1831. I was so fascinated with this book that I next picked up The Origin Of Species. I did not immediately stop believing in God, but I did start thinking, and before long I was sitting in church wondering why humans engaged in such peculiar behavior, gathering together to sanctify ideas that had no grounding in reality, professing belief in things for which no credible evidence existed. Darwin brought out the skeptical observer in me, and I have continued to cultivate this attitude for over forty years.

I am providing a link to Dr. Holliday's Tulane website.

My next post will be on Dr. Janelle Schwartz's presentation - ’Something Far More Deeply Interfused’: Evolution as Illusion in Darwin and Shelley.”

This post was written by Mims Carter, the new Biloxi spirituality/skepticism examiner for examiner.com.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Louisiana High School Student Takes Stand Against Creationism

2011-02-24T04:50:00.001-06:00

As far too many adults in Louisiana seem determined to push their fundamentalist Christianity on the state's children, it has fallen to a high school student to fight for reality-based science education. Zack Kopplin, a senior at Baton Rouge Magnet High School, is at the forefront on efforts to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA). Passed in 2008, the LSEA encourages public school science teachers to include creationism in their classes.

It is great to see that efforts are underway to repeal this absurd law. We are facing similar legislation here in Mississippi, and while efforts to derail it have been successful so far, I will be surprised if we do not see it return.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Mississippi: Fattest and Most Religious

2010-11-21T08:27:00.001-06:00

Atheists living in Mississippi know full well that our state has the unfortunate distinction of being the most religious state in the U.S. We also happen to have the highest rate of obesity. Is this merely a coincidence, or might religiosity be associated with obesity and other poor health outcomes for a reason?

These are the questions raised in a thought-provoking press release from Tim Covell at Born Atheist.

An association between obesity and religiosity in no way means that one causes the other. But I found it striking how much we hear about the benefits of religion on health compared to how little we hear about the possibility that religiosity might not always be healthy.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Only 27% of U.S. Southerners Accept Evolution

2010-07-22T12:48:00.001-05:00

Following up on my recent post about evolution in Mississippi, we now have some data to examine. A poll on evolution and creationism by Angus Reid Public Opinion reveals some disturbing evidence of idiocy in our part of the world. Data were collected from the U.S., Great Britain, and Canada. Not surprisingly, the acceptance of evolution was lowest in the U.S. In fact, a whopping 47% of Americans indicated that they think some sort of god created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years! Another 35% chose evolution, and 18% were unsure.

As if that wasn't bad enough (and it is), things deteriorate even further when one considers the U.S. data by region. The percentage of people accepting evolution in the South drops to 27%, with 51% preferring creationism. Only 27% of the people in our area accept the reality of evolution, the foundation of modern biology.

Full results in the form of a .pdf file can be found here.

H/T to The Godless Monster

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Evolution is Taboo in Mississippi

2010-07-16T10:17:00.001-05:00

I had an interesting conversation with a woman who moved to Mississippi within the last few years and is still struggling to adjust. She's teaching an undergraduate course at a state university and was surprised to observe such negative reactions from the students to the subject of evolution. I thought I'd mention this here because I'm not convinced that most people realize what a problem this is in our state, even at the university level.

We all know that red states where evangelical fundamentalist Christianity reigns supreme often struggle with evolution in junior high and high school. It should not surprise us one bit that these problems continue at the university level. And yet, I continue to be shocked and disappointed that higher education does not necessarily have an easier time dealing with such topics.

The idea that a college professor might not feel safe discussing evolution in a university classroom is appalling. But doing so can bring direct confrontation from students, complaints by students and their parents to university administrators, poor course evaluations, and other negative outcomes. We'd all like to assume that university administrators and department chairs would protect faculty in these situations, but this does not always happen.

What this means is that the religious delusions of a loud minority has the power to harm the education other students receive. This is unacceptable.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Mississippi is Unhealthy

2010-01-23T07:48:00.001-06:00

A public health report released this week found that Mississippi leads the U.S. in obesity and the complete absence of physical activity among adults.

"Physicians know all too well the health behaviors such as poor diet, too little exercise, tobacco use, substance abuse, contribute to heart disease, diabetes, cancer and other fatal conditions. If you don't take care of yourself, your health will go up in smoke," said Dr. Randy Easterling, president of the Mississippi State Medical Association.

I suspect that poverty is one important factor here. Poor education is likely another. Could religious doctrines about the relatively low worth of the body vs. the soul be yet another contributing factor?

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Action Alert: Oppose House Bill 586

2010-01-16T09:47:00.001-06:00

I received the following today from the National Center for Science Education:

Dear Mississippi members of NCSE,

We thought you would like to know about a proposed bill which has just been introduced in the Mississippi legislature by Rep. Gary Chism [R-District 37]. House Bill 586 has been referred to the House Education Committee.

HB 586 would require local school boards to begin every high school biology course with a lesson on human evolution. However, the bill mandates that such lessons "... shall not evidence bias through selective instruction on the theory of evolution, but rather, shall have proportionately equal instruction from educational materials that present scientifically sound arguments by protagonists and antagonists of the theory of evolution."

The bill provides no indication of how to define or recognize "scientifically sound arguments", but is clear in requiring equal time for "educational materials" [also undefined] from both supporters and opponents of evolution. Since there are no "scientifically sound arguments" against evolution which have been presented or accepted by the scientific community, it seems clear that any arguments against evolution presented in such a lesson are very likely to be the sort of religiously-based ones which creationists put forward. Thus this bill could easily have the effect of opening science classrooms to the presentation of those particular religious views which reject evolution.

Last year Rep. Chism introduced a bill which would have required biology textbooks in Mississippi to include an evolution disclaimer similar to that mandated in Alabama. At the time he was quoted in the "Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal" as saying "Either you believe in the Genesis story, or you believe that a fish walked on the ground."

To read the full text of HB 586, see:
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2010/html/HB/0500-0599/HB0586IN.htm

NCSE has a news story about this bill here:
http://ncse.com/news/2010/01/antievolution-legislation-mississippi-005283

If you should want to contact your representative or members of the Education Committee about HB 586, the following may prove useful.

A roster of House members, with contact information:
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/members/h_roster.pdf

A list of House committees with their members:
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/htms/h_cmtememb.xml

To track the status of HB 586 [or any other bill]:
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/lookup.htm

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Gary Chism: Hero of the Religious Right in Mississippi

2010-01-14T02:04:00.011-06:00

On January 5th, 2010, Mississippi State Representative Gary Chism introduced House Bill 46, which has a summary that reads "To provide that the sale of utilities to churches shall be exempt from sales taxation; and for related purposes". On January 12, Mr. Chism introduced House Bill 586, which will require biology teachers to "present scientifically sound arguments by protagonists and antagonists of the theory of evolution."

Mr. Chism is a social conservative and on more than one occasion he has introduced bills that blur the line between the Constitutional idea of state-church separation. Several of our readers here at Mississippi Atheists took an active role in spreading the word about House Bill 25, a bill introduced by Mr. Chism which threatened science education in Mississippi. That bill died in committee. Mr. Chism told a reporter at the website OneNewsNow that House Bill 25 was used to test the waters in preparation for a bill requiring that Mississippi schools teach "the strengths and weaknesses of evolution" some time in 2010. He wasn't kidding. It is time to spread the word once again.

The new rallying cry of the Creationist movement is to "teach the controversy". Without out a doubt, there is a controversy: the theory of evolution is in direct contrast to a literal interpretation of the Genesis account of the Bible, which many people still believe to be the inerrant in all factual detail. This is certainly a discussion for the social studies classroom, but not the biology laboratory. Within the scientific community, there is no controversy: the theory of evolution is currently our best explanation for describing the observed phenomena of natural selection, random mutation, and adaptation. If there is a "scientifically sound argument" that anything biologists have observed really wasn't observed, I want to know about it. Arguments against evolution should be coming from real scientists doing real laboratory work, not from lawmakers forcing their ideology into high school classrooms or traveling preachers who mislead people on science despite having a PhD in biology.

With House Bill 46, he continues this tradition of giving preferential treatment to religious organizations. This is the key portion of the bill:

Gross income from sales to chruches[sic] exempt from federal income taxation under USCS Section 501(c)(3) of electricity, current, power, natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas or other fuel for heating, lighting or other use, and sales of potable water to such churches shall be excluded form taxable gross income of the business.

What Mr. Chism is proposing with this law is that business do not have to pay taxes associated with income received in the sales of utilities to churches, but he makes no mention of secular organizations which are also classified under Section 501(c)(3). If this bill were to go into effect, it would encourage utility companies to provide more support to religious organizations than to secular organizations. I would encourage the Mississippi State Legislature to amend this bill by striking the occurrences of "churches" and replacing those occurrences with "nonprofit organizations". Or just let the bill die in committee.

Mr. Chism has a history of introducing bills which support the religious right ideology, but most of these unconstitutional bills die in committee. We can write, call, and e-mail our legislators and local newspaper editors to restart the dialog about the importance of science education in Mississippi, or we can take our chances and do nothing. As with HB25, we will be posting our letters on this site and encourage you to write your own.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Louisiana Policy May Allow Creationism in Science Class

2010-01-07T10:39:00.001-06:00

Americans United for Separation of Church and State is asking the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to reconsider plans to adopt a policy that favors creationism through "supplemental materials" for use in public school science classes.

"It's obvious what's going on here," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "Louisiana elected officials are once again trying to undercut the teaching of evolution and slip creationism into science classes. This effort must fail."

According to Americans United, the policy provides a loophole through which creationist doctrine may enter the public school classroom. Not surprisingly, the legislation was supported by Christian extremist groups such as the Louisiana Family Forum, an affiliate of Dobson's Focus on the Family.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Victor Stenger in Jackson, MS

2009-10-14T14:52:00.001-05:00

PUBLIC LECTURE

Millsaps College
October 22, 7:00 pm
Academic Complex 215

The New Atheism
Taking a Stand for Science and Reason

Speaker: Victor J. Stenger

Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado and Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii

Respondent: Steven G. Smith

Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Millsaps College

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Brad Harrub (1)

2009-08-16T00:01:00.003-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

A friend of mine sent me an e-mail telling me about a Creationism seminar being taught by Dr. Brad Harrub, PhD to be held at the Collierville Church of Christ in Collierville, TN. (I'm sorry, but this story is a rare departure from Mississippi.) This e-mail wasn't from an online atheist buddy informing me of a nearby attack on science, but a member of this church wanting to inform me about the latest in attacks on god. I even gave my friend a ride home after the meeting. I hope the church sends me a "thank you" card for taking care of one of their own.

The lecture was titled "Atheism’s Attack on America". I eagerly wanted to know how much destruction that I have rot on America. I dare say that America will never recover from the devastating blow that all atheists have dealt to her core values of baseball, apple pie, and Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons. Go ahead. Name one The Four Seasons song without looking it up. If you can't, then the atheists have already won.

All atheists are trying to say is "There's probably no god," and "Church and state shouldn't influence each other." The first point is debatable, and we love to argue with others over it. The second point is not, and we will work to ensure it. If there is one value that atheists have tried to change it's the value of thinking for one's self independent of any religious dogma. But therein lies the issue: shall we decide between man's wisdom or god's wisdom? If you've been following this issue any, then you know that we spend a great deal of effort trying to convince people that there probably isn't a god, therefore there probably isn't any divine wisdom to be found. Stop worrying and enjoy your life.

Who's this guy kidding? The entire Collierville Church of Christ, that's who, as well as every other church where he has given his "Origins" seminar. Dr. Harrub gives this talk around 40 times per year and can give the talk at your next event for $1200. At this seminar, no minds were changed. In fact, everyone in the room (including myself) was more firmly grounded in their original positions. That's how you know that the seminar is a complete failure. The information is misrepresented, the Christians accept it uncritically, and the atheists do their best to correct the misinformation in the question and answer period.

You are probably wondering what atheists are guilty of doing. Dr. Harrub flashed a quote on the screen. "Let me control the textbooks, and I will control the state. -Adolph Hitler (2)." After we took god out of our textbooks, our country has become more immoral. We can show this by looking at the dramatic increase in crime and teen pregnancy rates and by completely ignoring ever changing socio-economic factors. You or I may think that the simple removal of god from textbooks by atheists because of an evil German dictator to harm American values is a proposition that only a madman would maintain. You might even call it hate speech toward atheists. But Dr. Harrub also points out that our textbooks have evolution and evolution just isn't true (3).

Yes, Dr. Harrub is a creationist, which means he's among the 0.14% of scientists who believe in Creationism (4). In order to prove his point, he has to misrepresent the theory of evolution anyway he can. He has a PhD in Neurobiology from the University of Tennessee. He had to understand the cornerstone of biology to advance in his studies and complete his dissertation, so I have no doubts that he realizes that it's all a misrepresentation. He paraded the classic perceptions of transitional humans: Piltdown man, Nebraska Man, and Lucy and others. Some of these fossils have been discredited by other scientists (5). Others, such as Lucy, Dr. Harrub had to weaseled this on his own to discredit the fossil.

Oh, then the question and answer session came, and it was dominated by atheists who were rightfully angry at the hate speech. The atheists corrected his slides on church and state cases. They defended themselves to the church as having morals. One person pointed out that we, as Americans, enslaved one race of people and nearly exterminated another while our children were learning about god in the public schools during the 19th century, so his thesis is bunk. And yes, the atheists defended the theory of evolution. As the questions dragged on, one person asked Dr. Harrub about why he thought homosexuality was immoral and his answer was for the same reasons that rape is immoral (which I found horribly offensive). The issue of morality was a major point of contention. Dr. Harrub asked one of the atheists where he gets his morals, and he answered that morals primarily come through the avoidance of pain and suffering. Dr. Harrub then asked if it was moral to beat small girls who are unable to experience physical pain due to a neural disability (6). Tensions were very high. There was one church member who was mocking all of the questions on morality by cocking his index finger and thumb as if it were a gun and pointing it at various people in the room (complete with making the shooting sound). The atheists asked why god would command genocide in the Old Testament. Dr. Harrub said that god would never command such a thing, and we would never be able to provide Bible verse to support a claim. I found the passage, so that makes Dr. Harrub a liar.

1 Samuel 15:2-3 - Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

The atheists in attendance left on a higher moral ground than the speaker. I was proud to tell others in attendance that I was an atheists in the church.

(1) is a used car salesman for Jesus. Anyone who plays this fast and loose with the truth always has a backup career.
(2) By the way, I can find no credible source to back up this quote, but I have found hundreds of Christian apologetics sites repeating it. It's probably a fabrication.
(3) Dr. Harrub showed slides of quotes on evolution from popular biology textbooks. One of those textbooks was written by Kenneth Miller, a devout Roman Catholic who has written plenty on evolution/creationism controversy. I wanted to ask Dr. Harrub why he was quoting a Roman Catholic as an example of why atheists are attacking America.
(4) http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
(5) Science is awesome because scientists are actively critical of every other scientist. Only the best ideas should be allowed to survive. Dr. Harrub is being critical of science, but he should also know that his criticisms have been dealt with many, many times. If he honestly believes that he has a legitimate point to make on the theory of evolution, he should make his point the proper way: by aggregating research data, writing a paper, passing peer review and discussing the paper at a conference. I encourage every Christian creationist reading this message to encourage this of Dr. Harrub. His details can be found on his contact page. Be polite if you contact him.
(6) I'm not making this up.

Subscribe to Mississippi Atheists

Most Americans Do Not Believe In Evolution

2009-07-03T06:54:00.000-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

Pharyngula reports the results of an international survey conducted by the British Council assessing people's opinions about evolution. The results are not surprising, but they certainly aren't encouraging either. More than half of Americans do not believe in evolution. I desperately want to believe that we can do better, but I recognize that considerable effort will be required.

God made the curvy lines.

2009-04-11T12:01:00.009-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

Growing up, I was in the Boy Scouts. In learning about orienteering and map reading, I was taught this simple rule:

Humans made the straight lines. God made the curvy lines.

While this advice may be good for differentiating man-made and non-man-made features on a map, it assumes everything was designed by either humans or a god. What if we discover that something was developed through purely natural processes? It might change the advice to this: "Humans made the straight lines. Everything else is yet to be determined." While this is a better statement, it doesn't role off the tongue like "God made the curvy lines."

A recent commenter asked this question, which I believe deserves its own post:

What would it take to convince you that something was intelligently made? What is your standard to judge between what is natural and what is intelligent? If you do not have a standard to judge, then how do you eliminate intelligence as an explanation?

Let us consider an Object A. Object A fits in my hand, looks like a duck and it appears to be made out of wood. I picked it up at the county fair for $5. A man with a long beard and a knife tells me, "I whittled that myself." I don't have a reason to doubt the man, so I believe him. I could be truly skeptical and ask the man to carve another wooden duck in my presence. That would certainly convince me that it was intelligently made.

Ray Comfort once held a copy of the Mona Lisa on national television and said that a painting must have a painter. I guess this is true if your definition of "painting" requires a painter. Nobody alive today had any contact with Leonardo da Vinci, but it could be shown that the Mona Lisa really was a da Vinci painting by comparing it to other works by da Vinci. Sometimes it's not as simple. Jackson Pollock dipped a paint brush into a can of paint and flung it at a canvas repeatedly. If I were to knock a paint can full of brushes off of a table and onto a canvas and through happenstance created an identical image to that of a Jackson Pollock painting, I still just created a mess. Two identical images were made, but one was deliberate work of art and the other was an accident. Determining whether a painting was intelligently made should not be limited to the narrow examination of a single painting, for we might deceive ourselves. (Let us not confuse our own physiology as products of an accident. We are products of evolution, which is not an accidental process.)

William Paley described a hypothetical event where he was crossing a field and spotted a rock. The rock was unimpressive, so he quickly moved on. But then he spots a watch. A watch is a complex device used for precision timekeeping, it has a clear purpose, and thus it must have a watchmaker. Our world is filled with complex organisms, each with their own subsystems, and those subsystems have outlined purposes. By using the same reasoning, we must all be intelligently designed. We are left to wonder why Paley failed to see the evidence for design or purpose when examining the rock.

The watchmaker analogy is still alive today in the form of the Intelligent Design movement. In part 5 of the popular 12 part series on Christian epistemology, "The Truth Project", Dr. Del Tackett teaches that Paley's watchmaker analogy is a convincing alternative to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. Dr. Tackett failed to notice that it even convinced Charles Darwin at one point. Darwin once remarked that this was the best argument available for the existence of God, but that was before he wrote "On the Origins of Species."

But why would Darwin eliminate intelligence as an explanation for the origins of species? Simple: he conceived an alternative idea, tested it, and it worked. His hypothesis was that organisms slowly change across generations, and these generational changes eventually give rise to new species. He tested his hypothesis repeatedly using plants and animals, then he refined this new theory till it could be defended in the public eye. Darwin's idea was not a thought experiment such as Paley's watchmaker analogy; it was theory that had conclusive supporting evidence. Darwin ruled out intelligence through experimentation.

Issac Newton was one of the greatest thinkers to ever exist, yet he still advocated Intelligent Design. Let us be reminded that Newton invented calculus because existing mathematics failed him when trying to understand gravity. Newton saw only natural forces at work when trying to explain the speed at which objects fall to the ground, but then he saw the God of the universe when trying to explain the revolution of planets around the Sun. The only way the planets could orbit was through the power of God. When a different scientist, Pierre-Simon Laplace, created the necessary mathematical models to explain the orbits of Saturn and Jupiter, he was asked why there was no mention of God in any of his explanation. His reply: "I have no need of that hypothesis." Laplace ruled out intelligence through experimentation.

Science works through the "law of parsimony", which is often called "Occam's Razor". Among two or more plausible explanations, the simplest explanation is usually right. In the context of the original question, this is a debate between a natural explanation and supernatural explanation. Natural explanations can be tested and repeated independently and we can be intensely critical of the procedures and results. It is much harder (some say impossible) to examine the supernatural with a critical eye, which is why all supernatural arguments can safely be ignored. Carl Sagan says that we should give supernatural explanations the Scottish verdict of "not proven".

My standard for ruling out intelligence is through experimentation. I advise you, the reader, to accept the natural explanations when there is supporting evidence and withhold judgment when there is not. This skeptical outlook is partly the reason why I am an atheist. Thank you for your question.

Part of this post was derived from a talk given by Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Victor Stenger Coming to Mississippi

2009-03-29T12:47:00.000-05:00

Cover via Amazon

The following is an e-mail from Victor Stenger. He is going to be in Mississippi in October and is willing to give a talk in Oxford or possibly other locations. He is asking only for some help with travel expenses. He is already booked in Memphis and plans to speak in New Orleans as well. It would be great to have him speak in Mississippi if arrangements can be made.

---

Hi from Vic Stenger, author of the 2007 New York Times bestseller God: The Failed Hypothesis--How Science Shows that God does not Exist.

My wife and I will be driving down the Mississippi from St. Louis to New Orleans in October. I have talks scheduled along the way in St. Louis on October 17, Memphis on October 18, and New Orleans October 24. We will be in Oxford on October 20, Vicksburg October 22, and New Orleans October 23-29.

I would be happy to talk in Oxford on October 20, or perhaps elsewhere if it can be arranged. I have attached some information.

I do not require an honorarium, but some help with travel expenses would be appreciated.

It is also possible for your to sell copies of my books and keep the profits. If interested, I will tell you how.

I hope to hear from you.

Vic Stenger

Scientific Organization to Boycott Louisiana

2009-02-14T10:34:00.005-06:00

I've just learned from a reader that the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology is boycotting the state of Louisiana and refusing to hold events in New Orleans in order to protest SB 561, Louisiana's Scientific Education Act. Good for them!

You can read their letter to Gov. Jindal here.

NCSE Needs Help to Defend Science Education in Mississippi

2009-02-07T11:02:00.001-06:00

As you will see from the message below, the National Center for Science Education needs the help of Mississippians to protect science education in our state. HB 25 was probably only the first step in a series of coordinated attacks on reality-based education in our state. I am going to contact them today and make sure I'm on their mailing list.

Dear NCSE supporter,

Hello! I'm a staffer from the National Center for Science Education. I'm writing to you because you've shown considerable interest in defending good science education in the past. In the near future we will be starting an email list to discuss threats to Mississippi science education, and to help coordinate responses. We would appreciate your involvement if you have time and interest.

As you probably know, state representative Gary Chism has introduced House Bill 25, which would require Mississippi public school textbooks to carry an antievolution "disclaimer" similar to that mandated in Alabama.

House Education Committee chairman Cecil Brown has told concerned citizens that he expects the bill to die in his committee; this has been the fate of several other anti-evolution bills over the last few years. However, Rep. Chism claims to be "testing the waters" for yet another bill next year, which will support the teaching of "the strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory."

Moreover, Mississippi lawmakers this winter have introduced no less than four identical copies of the "Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act" (such as HB 159 and SB 2054) in each chamber of the legislature.

These bills do not specifically target evolution or science education, but are likely to make it more difficult to evaluate the academic work ofstudents who plead religious motivations.

Similar bills in other states have attracted concern from science teachers' organizations. In this legislative climate, the House Education Committee may find it more difficult to guard against attacks on good science education.

If you would like to be on our mailing list, please let me know. And if you intend to write or speak in defense of teaching evolution, we would be happy to assist you in any way we can.

--
Anton Mates
Public Information Project, National Center for Science Education 420 40th
St. #2 Oakland, CA 94709-2509
510-601-7203
www.ncseweb.org

How to Defend Science Education in Your State

2009-01-23T05:58:00.000-06:00

Image via WikipediaScience education continues to come under attack in many states by creationists and their misinformed allies. Those of us in the reality-based community must remain committed to defending reason and promoting quality education in all fields. Fortunately, grassroots activism can be effective in reaching our elected officials and influencing public attitudes. Drawing on the recent example of Mississippi's HB 25, a measure that would require the board of education to affix anti-evolution disclaimers to science textbooks, I would like to provide this brief how-to guide for promoting activist efforts in the face of ignorance.

After learning of HB 25, we at Mississippi Atheists wrote a post to bring the issue to the attention of our readers and simultaneously informed members of the Mississippi Atheists group at Atheist Nexus. Through these actions, we estimate that roughly 100 people, mostly residents of our state, learned about the bill, what it would do to science education, and most importantly, what they could do about it.

Next, a couple of our authors used Meetup.com groups to spread the word among a wider circle of Mississippians. This sparked word-of-mouth communication in virtually every corner of our state. As word spread locally, a handful of bloggers outside our state picked up the story and informed their readers. This is a critical benefit of the blogosphere: compelling stories spread like wildfire.

Our focus at this point was in encouraging two specific actions: (1) writing letters to elected officials on the legislative committees considering the bill, and (2) writing letters to the editors of local newspapers to influence public opinion. Follow-up posts were designed to give readers multiple examples of both.

We also contacted the National Center for Science Education and Freedom From Religion Foundation to make sure they knew what was happening in our state. American Atheists even issued an action alert.

By this point, several letters had been sent to state representatives, and at least a couple letters to the editor had been published in nearly every paper in the state. The outpouring of support and willingness to engage in effective activism was truly astounding. We then received word that our efforts were having an impact and that the bill was expected to die in committee.

The status of HB 25 in Mississippi is uncertain, but we expect the bill will not make it out of committee. Best of all, I think we will be better prepared to tackle the next assault on science education that comes our way.

Here are some recommendations for organizing similar activist efforts to defend reality-based education in your state:

Increase awareness. Use blog and forum posts to raise awareness among likely stakeholders. In these posts, be sure to address both what is at stake and what readers can do about it. Provide links for more information, and offer specific suggestions about who to contact, etc. Use relevant Meetup.com groups to inform others in your state. E-mail the story to some of the big blogs for whom such a story might be relevant.
Promote action. As you are working to increase awareness, you want to simultaneously offer specific suggestions for what readers can do. Recognize that many of those learning about the issue may not have participated in previous activist efforts like this. Write follow-up posts in which you give specific examples of letters to elected officials, letters to the editor of local newspapers, etc.
Enlist support from the heavy-hitters. For activism around science education, contact the National Center for Science Education. For issues that also raise church-state issues, consider the Freedom From Religion Foundation, American Atheists, or Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The idea is to make sure some of the advocacy groups that have attorneys at their disposal know what is going on.
Share any responses. Nothing reinforces activists quite like hearing that they are making a difference. Be sure to share any responses received from the decision-makers being contacted.
Be patient but persistent. Even after being told that a letter I wrote to the editor of my local newspaper would be printed, it did not appear for more than a week. Not every letter will be published, and not every elected official will respond. Stick with it.

Everyone is capable of this sort of activism. While it can be time-consuming, it is for the benefit of our society and is certainly worthwhile.